Received: from localhost ([::1]:51422 helo=stodi.digitalkingdom.org) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1eVhDS-0006ti-Jl; Sun, 31 Dec 2017 09:16:06 -0800 Received: from mail-wm0-f51.google.com ([74.125.82.51]:40320) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1eVhCv-0006rl-2w for llg-members@lojban.org; Sun, 31 Dec 2017 09:15:36 -0800 Received: by mail-wm0-f51.google.com with SMTP id f206so54890459wmf.5 for ; Sun, 31 Dec 2017 09:15:31 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=PFY3mshQ2akT/WotpydS3x1Q1evq1wSuKVUY9g9ixgU=; b=XTwWE+UGTDrXBa7UnXulEevRomh6iwiBRhP2mWObqS6098FFp+YeCCtCc5zE9ISNa7 DV4Wez1U7zbG6VDfClOlGhNrcWphxZ5pswIXLmu/3iv+/AhRjdIdkvGHt56Ak4Iz0TRh LpZG1EYfHbOH+5DWlnlDJmy20RCkEkxbc0D5SnilfhbNZKOLT2gJ121fCtwKmXhmvk3e Hfpg0Z3JXyAFQENGOJV+L2tHaWxER/8ctclq6cnprQvlLn54OpzeRFvcTtwmkZza1lq1 6a9dWI4acSCQT9meIup2H8slLpdhUvKGXuiZkZ2mRJ845CPuMeDf/fIeSiwzkLiVNgKH a4Hw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=PFY3mshQ2akT/WotpydS3x1Q1evq1wSuKVUY9g9ixgU=; b=ce3sG1Cpnmw0ioPeZU2m7MgXzUMIl2luO7eDxleHF4JIZ2+j78p4/cV+m0D/+B+sjO IdjW8m9y/RvIbYq7zKzyf0UjjdoxHg4hZd1waRX2jw48xeE10cUIcglqetj1fN+mj8uK aJ9ZusF5s2ghHvrgVXkleeLOWa0su/PgyTINF6copHKb3binPlzMTcJv0DmY1ftAlW0z zWbhtJNYTCsGsnFx9Ag+Tt4aWCnFdOnO7VAbsZNsuWm+xuIzdDpkbDMyaz3X11JVLzfW QnpWpAaG2UkGKft86+z73iyv2YHrT56rhiHneMqBNlARUpjtVD6bkgos3Mynd7YFCBeD 2SEw== X-Gm-Message-State: AKGB3mIUTih907RbQHBy3kRNHyWNUIrSE9Rdyz5VZj2vvKEHKDp1IZ44 Lg/Lhl37BUtlupBuhH67qcILRe8IY/6NJSscug== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACJfBou3gYQv9qfmAlCtMIR93PhO4vYut7pyvqHgkpxhbbFAYFDt3W84YmJ4GL5WsBlmG521ApOgJ5RksBquLHlFoDE= X-Received: by 10.80.214.139 with SMTP id r11mr54892046edi.17.1514740522894; Sun, 31 Dec 2017 09:15:22 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.80.173.219 with HTTP; Sun, 31 Dec 2017 09:14:42 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <6c826210-9f71-1813-2957-7e5593ad18ed@lojban.org> <0bd3827c-a523-3356-8107-d30854d9d466@selpahi.de> From: Gleki Arxokuna Date: Sun, 31 Dec 2017 20:14:42 +0300 Message-ID: To: llg-members@lojban.org X-Spam-Score: -2.0 (--) X-Spam_score: -2.0 X-Spam_score_int: -19 X-Spam_bar: -- Subject: Re: [Llg-members] Unfinished Business: BPFK X-BeenThere: llg-members@lojban.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: llg-members@lojban.org Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============7742511375026012920==" Errors-To: llg-members-bounces@lojban.org --===============7742511375026012920== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="f403045dad2ccb4c660561a6025b" --f403045dad2ccb4c660561a6025b Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 2017-12-31 20:02 GMT+03:00 Riley Martinez-Lynch : > Regarding Curtis=E2=80=99 motions, particularly the second, I=E2=80=99d l= ike to note that > the bylaws that were quoted earlier in the meeting as not mentioning > =E2=80=9Clojban=E2=80=9D are the bylaws as they existed prior to the amen= dments which were > made in 2003 which added this language: > > In the furtherance of its purposes as stated above, The Logical Language > Group, Inc. shall place priority on support of the community of persons > learning, using, experimenting with, and promoting the language known as > "Lojban - A Realization of Loglan" or alternatively "Lojban=E2=80=9D. > > > The amendments were not =E2=80=9Censcrolled" until many years later, whic= h may be > responsible for any confusion on this point. > > I consider the current text of article 2 section 1 to be broad enough, fo= r > better or worse, to include investigation, implementation, experimentatio= n, > and support of any "artificially-engineered natural language=E2=80=9D. I= =E2=80=99m > inclined to support narrowing that mission to emphasize =E2=80=9Clogical= =E2=80=9D > languages, as implied in our name, but I think we ought to be careful abo= ut > the language that we use to define such a thing. Part of the problem spac= e > includes defining the problem, so there=E2=80=99s a risk that whatever ad= ditional > commitments we might take on could become a liability down the road. I > would prefer that we avoid commitments that might be interpreted to > constrain the design decisions or implementation details of such a > language. That includes specifying a =E2=80=9Clojban derivative=E2=80=9D. > > That said, I applaud and stand ready to support any effort to document an= d > use any language that we recognize as aligned with the goals of logical > language, with or without an amendment or resolution, and I think the > bylaws justify that position. > > And (whom I hope I understand is retracting the resignation he submitted = a > couple of months back!) imagined a world where "xorxes and selpa'i had be= en > given carte blanche to write CLL 2.0 according to their own best > judgement=E2=80=9D. I would like challenge the idea that this organizatio= n is > exercising any material prior restraint that would prevent such a thing > from happening. If John Cowan had not produced a work that aligned with t= he > goals of this organization, it wouldn=E2=80=99t have received the support= that it > has. Likewise if xorxes and selpa=E2=80=99i were to collaborate on a new = reference > grammar, whether it be called =E2=80=9CCLL 2.0=E2=80=9D or anything else,= I think we=E2=80=99d be > well within our rights and duties to consider how we wanted to support th= at > work and describe it in relationship to our mission. > Thanks Riley for a clear, long (but not verbose) explanation of your concerns. I should only add that I have the same fears and suggestions. We haven't finished with one project (as several posts about the "death" of LLG or BPFK probably indicated) and might have to commit to even more projects. > On Dec 31, 2017, at 10:25 AM, selpahi wrote: > > Curtis moved the following: > > I move: > The LLG shall adopt, as a principal goal of the LLG (coequal with any > other principal goals), the intention of exploration and promotion of > logical language(s) in general, subject to the following definitional > framework and description: Presupposing that everything effable (i.e. > linguistically expressible) can be represented as a predicate-argument > structure (PAS), a logical language (in the technical sense, i.e. loglang= ) > is one that (syntactically-)unambiguously bidirectionally encodes an > unlimited number of PASs. (Also known by some as the 'monoparsing' > property. The relevant bidirectionality is conversion both from PAS to > phonological form and from phonological form to PAS.) > > > Seconded. > > Motion 2. A principal goal of the LLG (coequal with any other principa= l > goals) is promotion of Lojban (regardless of its status as a logical > language) as defined by documents endorsed by the LLG. > I likewise (same wording) so move, with terms as described in my > immediately previous motion in this message. > > > Seconded. > > Motion 3. A principal goal of the LLG (coequal with any other principa= l > goals) is creation of a Lojban derivative that is a logical language. I > likewise so move, with terms as described in my immediately previous two > motions in this message. > > > Seconded. > > My second does not include Curtis' amendment, because I consider the > definition of loglanghood given by And adequate as is. A language that do= es > not fulfill those (fundamental) requirements is not a logical language > ("loglang"). > > ~~~mi'e la selpa'i > > --- > Diese E-Mail wurde von Avast Antivirus-Software auf Viren gepr=C3=BCft. > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > > _______________________________________________ > Llg-members mailing list > Llg-members@lojban.org > http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-members > > > > _______________________________________________ > Llg-members mailing list > Llg-members@lojban.org > http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-members > > --f403045dad2ccb4c660561a6025b Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


2017-12-31 20:02 GMT+03:00 Riley Martinez-Lynch <<= a href=3D"mailto:shunpiker@gmail.com" target=3D"_blank">shunpiker@gmail.com= >:
Regarding Curtis=E2=80=99 motions, particularly the second= , I=E2=80=99d like to note that the bylaws that were quoted earlier in the = meeting as not mentioning =E2=80=9Clojban=E2=80=9D are the bylaws as they e= xisted prior to the amendments which were made in 2003 which added this lan= guage:

In the furtherance of its purp= oses as stated above, The Logical Language Group, Inc. shall place priority= on support of the community of persons learning, using, experimenting with= , and promoting the language known as "Lojban - A Realization of Logla= n" or alternatively "Lojban=E2=80=9D.

The amendments were no= t=C2=A0=E2=80=9Censcrolled" until many years later, which may be respo= nsible for any confusion on this point.

I consider the current text of article 2 section 1 to be broad = enough, for better or worse, to include investigation, implementation, expe= rimentation, and support of any "artificially-engineered natura= l language=E2=80=9D. I=E2=80=99m inclined to support narrowing that mission= to emphasize =E2=80=9Clogical=E2=80=9D languages, as implied in our name, = but I think we ought to be careful about the language that we use to define= such a thing. Part of the problem space includes defining the problem, so = there=E2=80=99s a risk that whatever additional commitments we might take o= n could become a liability down the road. I would prefer that we avoid comm= itments that might be interpreted to constrain the design decisions or impl= ementation details of such a language. That includes specifying a =E2=80=9C= lojban derivative=E2=80=9D.=C2=A0
That said, I applaud and stand re= ady to support any effort to document and use any language that we recogniz= e as aligned with the goals of logical language, with or without an amendme= nt or resolution, and I think the bylaws justify that position.

And= (whom I hope I understand is retracting the resignation he submitted a cou= ple of months back!) imagined a world where "xorxes and selpa'i ha= d been given carte blanche to write CLL 2.0 according to their own best jud= gement=E2=80=9D. I would like challenge the idea that this organization is = exercising any material prior restraint that would prevent such a thing fro= m happening. If John Cowan had not produced a work that aligned with the go= als of this organization, it wouldn=E2=80=99t have received the support tha= t it has. Likewise if xorxes and selpa=E2=80=99i were to collaborate on a n= ew reference grammar, whether it be called =E2=80=9CCLL 2.0=E2=80=9D or any= thing else, I think we=E2=80=99d be well within our rights and duties to co= nsider how we wanted to support that work and describe it in relationship t= o our mission.

Thanks Riley for= a clear, long (but not verbose) explanation of your concerns.
I = should only add that I have the same fears and suggestions.
We ha= ven't finished with one project (as several posts about the "death= " of LLG or BPFK probably indicated) and might have to commit to even = more projects.



On De= c 31, 2017, at 10:25 AM, selpahi <selpahi@selpahi.de> wrote:

Curtis moved the follo= wing:
I move:
The LLG shall adopt, as a pri= ncipal goal of the LLG (coequal with any other principal goals), the intent= ion of exploration and promotion of logical language(s) in general, subject= to the following definitional framework and description: Presupposing that= everything effable (i.e. linguistically expressible) can be represented as= a predicate-argument structure (PAS), a logical language (in the technical= sense, i.e. loglang) is one that (syntactically-)unambiguously bidirection= ally encodes an unlimited number of PASs. (Also known by some as the 'm= onoparsing' property. The relevant bidirectionality is conversion both = from PAS to phonological form and from phonological form to PAS.)

Seconded.

=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0Mo= tion 2. A principal goal of the LLG (coequal with any other principal goals= ) is promotion of Lojban (regardless of its status as a logical language) a= s defined by documents endorsed by the LLG.
I likewise (same wording) so= move, with terms as described in my immediately previous motion in this me= ssage.

Seconded.

=C2= =A0=C2=A0=C2=A0Motion 3. A principal goal of the LLG (coequal with any othe= r principal goals) is creation of a Lojban derivative that is a logical lan= guage. I likewise so move, with terms as described in my immediately previo= us two motions in this message.

Seconded.

My sec= ond does not include Curtis' amendment, because I consider the definiti= on of loglanghood given by And adequate as is. A language that does not ful= fill those (fundamental) requirements is not a logical language ("logl= ang").

~~~mi'e la selpa'i

---
Diese E-Mail wu= rde von Avast Antivirus-Software auf Viren gepr=C3=BCft.
https://www.avast.com/a= ntivirus


______________________________________________= _
Llg-members mailing list
Llg-members@lojban.org
http://mail.lojban.o= rg/mailman/listinfo/llg-members
=

____________________________________________= ___
Llg-members mailing list
Llg-members@lojban.org
http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-= members


--f403045dad2ccb4c660561a6025b-- --===============7742511375026012920== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Llg-members mailing list Llg-members@lojban.org http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-members --===============7742511375026012920==--